Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Testing the MongoDB Global Write Lock Improvements

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the heckling-haskell-hackers dept.

Databases 38

rick446 writes "I took some time to benchmark the global write lock improvements in MongoDB 2.0. From the article: 'MongoDB, as some of you may know, has a process-wide write lock... Per-database and per-collection locking is on the roadmap ..., but it's not here yet. What was announced in MongoDB version 2.0 was locking-with-yield. I was curious about the performance impact of the write lock and the improvement of lock-with-yield, so I decided to do a little benchmark, MongoDB 1.8 versus MongoDB 2.0.'"

cancel ×

38 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Incorrect hostname (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38569240)

Hurray for invalid SSL Certificates for JIRA!

Blah blah blah... what? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38569340)

It's like this articles starts in the middle of a sentence and I can't tell what the hell is going on.

OK, for starters, what the fuck is MongoDB? Just a single sentence or some mention would be helpful. Secondly, why is this front page material? It's just some crappy blog about some minor change to some product nobody uses, woopdeedoo.

Re:Blah blah blah... what? (5, Funny)

Trepidity (597) | more than 2 years ago | (#38569370)

I realize it's not widely known in the west, but it's an important database in Mongolia.

Re:Blah blah blah... what? (1)

kmoser (1469707) | more than 2 years ago | (#38582450)

No, it's the DB used by that dude from Blazing Saddles.

Re:Blah blah blah... what? (-1, Offtopic)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 2 years ago | (#38569384)

Unknown Lamer is one of the most boring editors in years. The Semantic Line Interface [slashdot.org] ? Gigabyte Board Sets Intel X79 Overclocking Record [slashdot.org] ?

Re:Blah blah blah... what? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38569648)

Yeah, we're nerds here. We like boring shit, fuck off.

Re:Blah blah blah... what? (2)

Toonol (1057698) | more than 2 years ago | (#38572416)

Seems like stuff slashdot needs more of. Less mobile phone stories, less political stories, more substantive and detailed tech stories.

Re:Blah blah blah... what? (1)

Overly Critical Guy (663429) | more than 2 years ago | (#38574286)

Needs more of? Did you read the semantic line interface link or the comments in the discussion? It was just some guy's indecipherable blog post about his text box idea.

Re:Blah blah blah... what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38569774)

shut up retard

Yea me too (3, Funny)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#38569390)

I hate it when I am benching my mongo and it locks its yeild, quite painful =O

Re:Yea me too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38574156)

Mongo like beans!

is it still web scale? (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 2 years ago | (#38569420)

It's great that they improved the locking. I just hope they didn't compromise web scalability in the process.

Re:is it still web scale? (5, Funny)

citizenr (871508) | more than 2 years ago | (#38569740)

It's great that they improved the locking. I just hope they didn't compromise web scalability in the process.

obligatory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2F-DItXtZs [youtube.com]

Re:is it still web scale? (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 2 years ago | (#38569832)

/dev/null webscales!!!

Re:is it still web scale? (1)

FlyingGuy (989135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38570072)

Oh my fucking god, don't ever post shit like this again.... I am off to the farm! I am laughing so fucking hard.....

Re:is it still web scale? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38570336)

I'm laughing so much I'm "bleeding out of my asshole". Thanks for that... sums up the nosql fanboys better than a million tedious technical discussions.

Re:is it still web scale? (1)

blackpaw (240313) | more than 2 years ago | (#38571040)

OMG, thank you so much. That was beautiful. Web Scale even.

Now please excuse, I have to find a plug for my bleeding ass hole.

Re:is it still web scale? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38569744)

mongodb never was web scale

Pushing locks down (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38569556)

Congratulations. You matter enough to bother reinventing this wheel again. If you continue to matter for a meaningful amount of time you'll end up locking individual documents, or whatever you call them. Oracle called that 'row' locking. 15 years ago.

Re:Pushing locks down (0)

FlyingGuy (989135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38570054)

Mod + 1x10^1000

Re:Pushing locks down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38573574)

Oh god ... this makes me feel old ... but Oracle introduced row level locking with the release of Oracle 6 ... in 1988. That's (ahem) 24 years ago. On that note, process wide locking? Really? Was this a high school project that went open source? If not, there's at least one software architect who needs to find another line of work.

Re:Pushing locks down (1)

steelfood (895457) | more than 2 years ago | (#38575968)

I don't understand why they (and almost every other bit player in databases) are loading everything into main memory. I know disk is slow, but there are more efficient uses for main memory. Like creating a list of locked memory locations. The initial disk hit (which can be offset by intelligent caching and in this case, intelligent lookup) is probably not nearly as detrimental to the database's usability as the limitations from putting the entire database into main memory.

As for locking, one of their particular challenges is that as a document-oriented db, the granularity of the lock is indeterminate. For a relational db, it's easy, because the way the data is structured and stored follows a certain hierarchy (row=level, page-level, table-level, etc.). However, the meta-structure in Mongo is loose, which means the locking scheme really needs to be either at the root or the leaf level. To do so at an arbitrary branch level would be difficult to implement properly.

But I still don't see why they couldn't be storing a sychronized list of locked memory locations.

Mong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38569600)

Yet another crappily named open source project.

Re:Mong (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38574650)

Not all open-source is the same. Some projects have great (or at least decent) names, some have terrible names. Similarly, some projects are great (technically), while others are shit. Sometimes the two even coincide, as we see with this one: it has a terrible name, and it's a shitty project, only now implementing concepts that real databases had back in the 80s or before.

Emperor Ming uses it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38569874)

That's good enough for me.

Website description vs reality (0)

WaffleMonster (969671) | more than 2 years ago | (#38569934)

"MongoDB (from "humongous") is a scalable, high-performance, open source NoSQL database"

LOL I think the word in parens they were looking for is "humours".

What's up with the offensive name? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38570188)

I thought "Gimp" was bad enough, but many people are going to find "MongoDB" deeply offensive. What is the point? Is the N-word going to feature in a major OSS project title soon?

Re:What's up with the offensive name? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38571334)

but many people are going to find "MongoDB" deeply offensive.

Mongo is slang for huge or big. Its like a Blazing Saddles reference to a character named Mongo; whereby it was stated, if you shoot him, you'll just make him mad. Beyond that, I'm not sure what's offensive about it.

Its a "big, bad ass database." What's so offensive?

Re:What's up with the offensive name? (2)

Man Eating Duck (534479) | more than 2 years ago | (#38571644)

Mongo is slang for huge or big. Its like a Blazing Saddles reference to a character named Mongo; whereby it was stated, if you shoot him, you'll just make him mad. Beyond that, I'm not sure what's offensive about it.

Its a "big, bad ass database." What's so offensive?

In my language, and apparently in English as well [urbandictionary.com] , "mongo" is a rude slang term for people with Down syndrome [wikipedia.org] . Although I chuckled when I first read about MongoDB it's obvious that those who chose the name didn't know about this. Disclaimer: Neither I nor any sensible person I know would ever use this slur.

Re:What's up with the offensive name? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38572094)

Except only a tiny minority of morons actually use "Mongo" as a derogatory term. There is English, slang, and then there is dip shit rat hoods speaking full blown, "Ima loser" ebonics - to which the urban dictionary caters. What you're citing is ebonics, which polite society ignores and rightfully looks down upon. Those who speak ebonics are typically viewed as morons, trash, and generally held to extremely low standards. They speak it to be anti-social and to hold themselves apart from productive and useful society. They are the anti-culture and openly anti-society. Sorry, but MongoDB is not derogatory in any way to anyone who matters.

As a side note, I'm frequently caught off guard how many foreigners are aware of extremely obscure American culture and vocabulary, believe it to be representative of the norm, and weigh references accordingly. Worse, some of these people actually believe Americans are stupid or uneducated when they don't know about some obscure reference which 99% of the country doesn't know, doesn't accept, or could care less about. Sorry, but the urban dictionary has about as much relevance as my underwear, to this discussion. Maybe if we were talking about hood rats, drug dealers, losers, gangs, etc., you know, other elements of anti-culture culture, but here, we're not talking about any of that. As such, such an obscure reference is completely inappropriate.

Honestly, I believe the name to be dumb too, but this is the first I've ever heard anyone to believe it to be derogatory. And that reference also seems to ignore the defacto and long standing slang definition of "mongo" which is, "huge or really big." So given the proper and defacto definition, its a database designed to deal with huge or really big data sets. Which unsurprisingly, makes complete sense given its a database whos claim to fame is dealing with huge and really big datasets. Hardly the derogatory reference you imply. If people wish to read something derogatory into that, it really says more about them than it does the name itself.

Long story short, using your reference is the same thing as believing the word "robot" is bolstering support for slavery; as was the original slang definition (Polish slaves IIRC). As a side note, in my teens, I've even used the expression, "That is one mongo dude." Its meaning was immediately understood given the context. And to be absolutely clear, I was not talking about a disease any way. He was a guy with massive muscles who more than likely was using steroids like candy. And this use, is the defacto slang use. But given the fact the word, "troll" (not implying anything) isn't even used properly anymore by the majority, I can certainly understand why someone might be confused or misled, especially if they are not native English speakers.

Re:What's up with the offensive name? (1)

Man Eating Duck (534479) | more than 2 years ago | (#38572900)

Woah... I didn't say or imply that MongoDB is meant to be derogatory, nor do I find it offensive myself. I intended to explain to my parent post why my grandparent (probably) found it offensive. I also noted that I was sure his implication about the name being deliberately offensive was wrong. I sometimes find that some people (grandparent?) really go out of their way to be offended by whichever coincidence, your post might be better suited as a reply to the topmost post in this thread?

The reason why I picked up on it is that most Norwegians recognise the word as derogatory and extremely rude, even though polite society ignores and rightfully looks down upon it (to steal your phrase). As in English, it's a word you'll find in some sociolects, or maybe hear from a schoolyard bully. I found the Urban Dictionary reference by googling the word, I probably should have qualified the link with "in some variants of english" or somesuch, but I was really only looking for an explanation of that particular meaning in English.

Peace?

Re:What's up with the offensive name? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38573534)

The term comes from "mongoloid", which originally refers to someone who has certain physical features that are common with Southeast Asian populations (hence the mongol part of it.) It can also be used in a negative context to refer to someone who has Down syndrome, which is what you were thinking of. "Mongo" would just be a shortened version of mongoloid, I assume. However, I don't think that I've ever heard someone say it instead of mongoloid. As the anonymous coward above suggested, it's probably just representative of the circles in which I travel.

Re:What's up with the offensive name? (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#38575600)

I grew up in England (when the official scientific term was "mongoloid") and never heard anyone say "mongo", though there was one kid who used to say "mungo". He wasn't one, but he wasn't far off.

"Mong" was much more common.

Disclaimer: Neither I nor any sensible person I know would ever use this slur.

Who gives a fuck what you think, you fucking spacker?

Re:What's up with the offensive name? (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 2 years ago | (#38582836)

Mong is slang. Mongo means nothing in English. It's also not that offensive anymore, especially when we're talking about Mongo Database, I didn't even make the connection until you pointed it out.

Ah, bless you MongoDB (2)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 2 years ago | (#38575486)

For when you're too cheap to spring for a BerkeleyDB license, some amateur playing a decade of catchup gives you everything you'd ever need, as long as you don't need support, performance, stability or data integrity.

Really interesting comments... (1)

greymeister (540786) | more than 2 years ago | (#38593082)

These comments seem up-to-date. That is if they were posted 5 years ago.

it's funny to read all the close minded comments (1)

feuertod (2547372) | more than 2 years ago | (#38625320)

because i've saved so much time not having to write 500+ lines of DDL for this new web application in MongoDB compared to using a relational database.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>